Visual Languages in Group Mapping

Date

August 24, 2025

Introduction

I’ve been looking at different mapping tools that represent group relationships. Actors mapping (Jones & Van Ael) uses symbols to show structural ties. Social Identity Mapping (SIM / oSIM), developed in social identity research, represents the groups people belong to and the strength of those ties. This post notes their visual differences and is a reminder to look more closely at the visual languages that underpin group mapping methods.

SIM / oSIM – Social Identity Mapping exists in both a paper-based format (SIM) and an online version (oSIM). It is used in social identity research (Haslam et al.) to map personal group memberships, their importance, and their compatibility.

Actors Mapping

Actors mapping sets out the players in a system—organisations, policymakers, funders, service users—and the relationships between them. It uses a defined visual grammar: straight lines for formal ties, broken lines for weaker ones, wavy lines for conflict. These symbols make system structure visible at a glance.

SIM / oSIM

oSIM is a visual method for mapping the social groups that matter to a person. Groups are represented as circles (or boxes in the online version). The size of the shape shows importance, while the distance from the self shows closeness of identification. Connections between groups are marked with lines, coded for compatibility—solid for strong fit, broken or wavy for weaker or conflictual ties.

The diagram below (Haslam et al., 2018b) shows both versions: the paper-based SIM and the electronic oSIM. The online tool extends the visual grammar with a weighting system that captures how positive, supportive, or representative each group is, as well as compatibility scores between groups. These are displayed as small numerical values beside each group, turning the diagram into both a visual and quantitative profile of identity structure.

Visual Language Matters

These approaches sit within wider mapping traditions: system diagramming (Donella Meadows) from systems science, behavioural systems mapping (BehaviourWorks Melbourne) from applied behavioural research, and the established field of network mapping across sociology and data science. Each discipline has developed its own conventions and complexity. My focus is on those methods that can be used with diverse groups of people, with widely differing backgrounds and abilities—visual languages that are rigorous enough to capture complexity, but simple enough to be understood and applied in health and care settings.

Next Steps

Note to self: Continue to collate visual codes from actors mapping, oSIM, system diagramming (Meadows), behavioural systems mapping (BehaviourWorks Melbourne), and network mapping.

Conclusion

Mapping methods carry their own visual languages. I see value in drawing on threads from many disciplines, and the opportunity—and the task—is to shape these into tools that are deliberate, comprehensible, and useful in practice. The aim is to build a robust, psychologically informed, and validated tool that can be applied in health and care co-design with diverse groups of people.

Related Resources

https://www.bispublishers.com/design-journeys-through-complex-systems.html
Jones, P. H., & Ael, K. van. (2023). Design journeys through complex systems: Practice tools for systemic design (2nd revised edition 2023). BIS Publishers.
https://osim.psy.uq.edu.au/
Bentley, S. V., Greenaway, K. H., Haslam, S. A., Cruwys, T., Steffens, N. K., Haslam, C., & Cull, B. (2020). Social identity mapping online. Journal of personality and social psychology, 118(2), 213–241. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000174
Haslam, C., Steffens, N. K., Branscombe, N. R., Haslam, S. A., Cruwys, T., Lam, B. C. P., Pachana, N. A., & Yang, J. (2019). The Importance of Social Groups for Retirement Adjustment: Evidence, Application, and Policy Implications of the Social Identity Model of Identity Change. Social Issues and Policy Review, 13(1), 93–124. https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12049